click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121127
20121127
SHOW
Cavuto 2
( more )
STATION
MSNBCW 23
CNNW 17
SFGTV2 16
FBC 13
SFGTV 13
CNBC 9
COM 8
CSPAN2 8
CSPAN 7
KGO (ABC) 7
KPIX (CBS) 5
KNTV (NBC) 3
KQED (PBS) 3
KTVU (FOX) 3
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 172
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 174 (some duplicates have been removed)
for city elective office." because that presumes that that person has not yet qualified, and that the purpose of the endeavor is to have them be a qualified candidate. it's not to support the election of the that person. it's really more about getting them to be a qualified candidate and i'm actually thinking less about the draft someone over the summer or draft someone as a written that actually happened in 1999 in ammiano for mayor. i recall some of that, but try not to recall all of it this sec. you could have the same efforts that happened with "run he had run," and progress for all," in the context of a write-in campaign and i'm not sure under this definition it would get captured. that is why i'm hung up on qualification versus election. >> may i ask you a question about that? >> sure. >> it's not clear to me why that is materially different from what we have? >> well, again it's not necessarily the election of a person. that is not necessarily the goal of the committee or the committee would assert that is not their goal. it's to get them to run and, in fact
to be a caretaker who was to fill the vacancy until the next election could be held. there were at least three sump committees, i think maybe four and some of them raised good sums of money. and my concern was that they were functioning as campaigns without actually being campaigns. the commission decided that they weren't campaigns under current law. but i think the commission agreed that the raising and spending of that size of money was not designed by the voters to be something that went unregulated. so the commission directed the staff to put together some provisions that would, as i said, regulate committed are designed to draft, particularly those that raise tangible sums of money. the reason for that is that a citywide campaign aimed at a single person still reaches people citywide, and would conceivably impact their decisions at the polling place based on the fact that you get someone to run for office by extolling their virtues. so these rectally simple to follow will treat under our law, such campaigns, such committees, excuse me, as primarily formed campaigns and therefore, report th
term. when barack obama was elected the first time, they summed it up with this head line. "black man given nation's worst job." that was for the start of his first term. might be more apt for second term. the second term is when the job turns out to be a difficult job for presidents. if you go back to woodrow wilson in his second term trying to join the league of nations, that was pretty much the end of wilson. that was his second term. when it was truman in his second term during the korean war, he fired general mcarthur. the country responded by throwing parades for the general who got fired. and harry truman left office with approval ratings that dick cheney would kill for, but for everyone else would see that as a disaster. second terms are almost always seen as a disaster, then at least when the big disappointments happen and often the failures. when the soviet union beat us, when the soviet union beat the united states to put the first space satellite into orbit, when no nation had put something like that -- up in space and had it stick there and the soviets did it first with s
or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but could the right have gone further had it been armed with a popular vote victory? there does seem to be a difference in the two parties. when al gore lost 12 years ago, he ignored his 600,000 vote victory in the popular vote. he just learned to live with the irony. republicans have carefully forgotten this bit of history, but i have real doubts those on the angry, demanding right would have been so quietly obedient to constitutional law. there's something out there on the right right now that is still uneasy with this defeat. sear
along with a majority in the house and regularly re-electing democratic or republican presidents. i think the best route is for the first one. get this filibuster thing done and get it back to what it was back in the 1930s, when we could all root for jimmy stewart and hope he could be that corrupt political machine we all love to hate in that greatest of all political movies. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politicsnation" with al sharpton starts right now. >> thanks, chris. and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, the mccain gang wants what it wants. today u.n. ambassador susan rice went to capitol hill to meet with the three republican senators who have been her harshest critics over what she said on sunday talk shows about the attacks on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. it was a meeting ambassador rice requested to try and clear the air. she went to the meetings with the acting cia director. but the republican senators were not swayed, not in the least. in fact, it sounded like they had settled on their talking points. here's what they said aft
won re-election fairly handily, but so did republican incumbents in the house. these are some stunning statistics that gerrymandering has created. 93% of the 205 house republicans who ran for re-election won. 88% of them won with 55% of the vote or more. the president received between 51% and 52% of the vote. once the votes are finally all counted. and even though everyone in washington may be saying the right thing, those facts make forging a deal structurally very difficult. on monday senator dick durbin admitted what we've been hearing behind the scenes. very little has been accomplished on negotiations on the staff level. >> now for ten days not much has happened. there's been a big thanksgiving break. a lot of turkey and stuffing. but now let's get back to business. >> although the white house said they remain optimistic, there doesn't appear to be a plan for another leadership meeting until progress is made between the white house team negotiating a deal that's led by secretary geithner but the house republicans, specifically in boehner's shop. in the meantime, to create the appe
in this election. what made them think so? the polls were tight but favoring president obama. what north star was guiding the gop convincing them that the white house would be back in their hands in january? back where their hankerings were convinced it belonged? there was a darker side to this deep sense of executive entitlement, the sense they had the same assumed access to the white house as they did in the corporate dining room. it's more than a bit frighting. i have heard at least one person of the right state their pained belief or relief that at least the election didn't end up in a situation where obama won the electoral vote but romney got the popular vote. i agree that would have been bad. it would have denied the democrat the clear mandate. the implication from the right wing seemed to have been had the republican candidate won the popular vote, there would be trouble of some undefined type. what the heck did that mean? yes, we've had to put up with this ridiculous secession petitions out there, the texas version having been signed by over 100,000 people since election day, but cou
wins this fight. sadly the real reason we've reached this point is because our elected representatives simply have no idea how to stop spending your money. as a result, the door has been kicked wide open for democrats to use this as an opportunity to scare you into thinking more government, well, that's got to be the answer. we've heard all of this before. now during both the obamacare and the stimulus debates, fear mongering was this president's go-to strategy into getting his way. this is what he predicted would happen unless his so-called recovery plan was passed. >> the situation we face could not be more serious. we've inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the great depression. economists across the spectrum have warned if they don't act immediately million more jobs will disappear, the national unemployment rate will approach double digits, more people will lose their homes and their healthcare, and our nation will sink into a crisis that at some point is going to be that much tougher to reverse. >> sean: a lot of good that did. what's stopping obama from imp
him, the people who elected him so he would defend the people. >> reporter: that could provoke more trouble after a weekend of violence hitting liberal and secular factions against morse's islamist supporters. last night in cairo, protesters threw rocks at police who fired back with tear gas. demonstrators also clashed with pro-morsi egyptians. attacks on the local offices of the muzz lum brotherhood left one teenager dead and dozens of people wounded. thousands of the president's backers staged rallies in several cities. >> we support mohamed morsi's correct decision and eventually the good from the bad will be distinguishable. we support dr. morsi. >> u.s. officials raised concerns about morsi's decree. today the state department's victoria newlyand called for calm. >> what is important to us is that these issues be slelgted through dialogues, that these issues be selgtzed democraticry. we are encouraged that the various important stakeholders in egypt are now talking to each other, that president morsi is consulting on the way forward but we're not going to prejudge where that wi
stech wents that have re-elected me. >> the pledge is for that congress. if i remember in congress in 1941, i would have signed a declaration of war against japan. the world has changed. >> but grover norquist does not think this world has changed. for republicans, who signed his pledge. >> are you going to want to exact punishment on them in two year, what? >> two things. there have been some, the folks whose pictures you put up there, some have engaged in impure thoughts. they haven't actually voted for a tax increase. we could ask president bush how his second term went after he broke his pledge. did he damage the pledge or by breaking his pledge, he lost a second term for the presidency. >> and this morning, even fox and friends were getting all philosophical about till death do us part pledges. >> i think you get into really difficult situations in relationships in general when you make people sign on the dotted line and then you crucify them if they decide to change their line. i'll bring it back to marriage. marriages don't work when one or both parties stand on both sides o
campaigner. we congratulate him on his re-election. what we don't know is whether he has the leadership qualities necessary to lead his party to a bipartisan agreement on big issues like we currently face. >> reporter: what you're seeing here is a slightly different strategy than we've seen in the past. that's the president focusing more on stakeholders, making his case to the public. bringing business leaders here to the white house, going on the road. and spending less time with lawmakers at least up to this point. >> sounds like a pressure tactic rather than perhaps a negotiation tactic. we'll keep on it, and let us know who else goes through those doors. dan lothian, thank you very much. you know, as we watch this story playing out, each side wants the other to give in. or at least give a little more in the fiscal tug-of-war. in a little less than a couple of minutes now, we'll see what the republicans want from the democrats. and what they might offer to get what they want. n't just listen . listen to these happy progressive customers. i plugged in snapshot, and 30 days later, i wa
election, same ballot and it is easy as it is in san francisco politics to characterize people on either side of the aisle, and milton said "let me find out what this guy is about. let's talk" and that was very fitting because that's exactly how i knew him to operate as a public servant and a person. he wanted to talk about the china town campus and talk about my background. he asked if we should build a campus, and i said it's something that we should do and there was certainly overwhelming support for the campus, but characteristic of his style and his principles he was never afraid to question power, or to question the popular way, and he had many good points, and that was very typical of what i have known him to be as a servant at city college. it was very difficult in his position, often being the one vote out of seven, often finding rubber stamping of a decision, fighting the way we were spending our money for ten years. ten years he was in a position most of the time alone trying to speak up and say why are we doing this? we're running the college into the ground. this sho
. thank you. >> bret: he is not campaigning for re-election, but president obama is back on the political stump to round up support for his economic plan to get off the fiscal cliff. chief washington correspondent james rosen tells us that has the congressional republicans feeling left out. >> ultimately, the leader is the president of the united states. >> this president in leading the white house and senate democrats in negotiations with the house republicans over how the avoid the so-called fiscal cliff decided for now to forgo further talks with the top lawmakers. task now delegated to the treasury secretary geithner it go and others. instead, president obama is utahing this critical week to meet with the ceos from small and big business and middle class taxpayers before boarding air force one on friday for campaign style rally in the philadelphia area. >> rather than sitting down with lawmakers of both parties an working out an agreement, he is back on the campaign trail. we are not going to this problem creating villains and drumming up outrage. >> he will be out trying to i'm sure
, these are noises that you made to sound conciliatory after an election, and we think back to 2009. the republicans sounded very conciliatory in the days after president obama's reelection when he was holding a high approval rating, but by april or may of his first year that that had melted away. so right now is happy talk from the republicans. we will see whether that materializes into votes. lou: such happy talk, why aren't there more smiling faces in the republican party? >> pretty unhappy talk from what i can tell, and to this point pretty frivolous. you see members of the united states senate demand is not even their negotiations, but taking a timeout to beat up on grover norquist to is some on elected activists type who was not a player in this and does not have a seat at the negotiating table, was not elected. what does he have to do with any of this? is seems to me this is the opportunity for the republicans in the house, but also to some extent in the senate to explain what they want to know what kind of entitlement cuts that will demand. instead they're beating a boy norquist. lou: we als
had. it is where they were before the election. they gotta wake up and see the election, change things and they actually have to meet democrats somewhere in the middle. >> bill: i would hope. i would hope. new york times this morning, front page of the business section in terms of closing loopholes, romney was never specific about which one. new york times is saying that they know -- now we know one of the ones they're targeting. the headline is a tax break once sacred is now seen as vulnerable. what they're talking about is the mortgage interest deduction. there was no doubt it is on the table. it is one they're targeting rather than raise tax rates on the wealthy, they're going to either limit or get rid of the mortgage interest deduction. which is the most popular one. >> the most popular one. politically difficult i think. that's really the problem with romney's entire approach that said we'll just create revenue by closing loopholes. you go down the list of the largest loopholes and pretty quickly, you get to
. and that is to build some public support tap on the good feeling from his re-election to give -- as ryan pointed out. there's some democrats including powerful ones like harry reid that say medicare and medicaid have to be off the table. those democrats do not include president obama who has made it clear he's open to a discussion about medicare and medicaid. and you usually would think there's not enough time to do serious entitlement reform. but the fact is, we've been talking about this set of issues for a year and more, lots of blueprints out there, including simpson/bowles. i think it is possible that will be part of a deal that is reached before the end of the year. >> this morning, dick durbin didn't really want to get into specifics. you aren't hearing a lot of numbers from a lot of people, but did say he was encouraged. take a listen. >> if i sound bland and general at this point, it's exactly to the point he made. when the doors close and we sit down with revenue on one side, entitlements on the other, then we get specific and come up with a bipartisan plan. >> ryan, to susan's point of wh
or -- >> absolutely not. they're stonewalling at every turn. they ran out the clock before the election. the president says now that the election is over, we'll cooperate. the most basic information about what happened on the night of the attack, and what survivors had to say after the attack is not being provided, and we'll talk more about that tomorrow. but long story short is i know very little from this administration about what happened in benghazi. what i'm finding out on my money makes me very upset. >> greta: is ambassador rice trying to test the waters if she's nominated? >> i have no idea, but i'll be glad to talk to her. again, it's not just about her. why did the president seven days after she spoke write this off as a video-inspired event when it's pretty clear to everybody early on this is a terrorist attack, in a coordinated way. there was no mob that turned into a riot. the riot that i've seen doesn't include heavy weapons and mortar trucks. >> greta: do i take it you're going to ask her direct questions? >> i'm going to ask her straight, direct questions because it's my job. president
, and it has become susan rice for quite some time during the election period as well as this time frame, and that seems to be a where a lot of public focus is, even though they raise criticisms about the intelligence community nor broadly. >> absolutely. kelly, thank you so much. joining me now is former state department middle east officer joel ruben, and molly ball and michael skirmonsih and jimmy williams. you heard kelly o'donnell report that the face of all of this is susan rice, but we know that the intelligence, the talking points, if you will, did not originate from her or the u.n. is it appropriate she's the face of all of this in your opinion? >> thank you, tamron, for having me on. it's unfortunate that dr. rice has become the face of this, because, in fact, she is a highly regarded accomplished civil servant leading our mission in the united nations. she was put in the spotlight in order to communicate what the intelligence community and administration believed to be the best way to communicate the attack on benghazi. rightly now congress is looking at the question of what w
. the president campaigned on this vision. and he won re-election. at least i think he did. but it also seems like the whitehouse white house is still considering another grand bargain. >> i think what we need to do and the president believes this is, let's go for the big deal. let's go for something that we can say for a 10 to 20-year period for the first time in a long time, our country is on the right sustainable fiscal path. the only way that gets done is for republicans to step out again and mercilessly get criticized by grover and norquist on the right. >> if this sounds familiar to you folks, it should because back income 2011, president obama brokered a deal with house speaker john boehner to avoid crashing through the debt ceiling. the deal was ultimately rejected by the republicans but we know it included cuts to the entitlement programs. according to "the new york times," president obama agreed to squeeze $250 billion from medicare in the next ten years with $800 billion moral in the decade after that. he was also willing to cut 110 billion from medicaid in the short term. democrats in
. these are four state department workers who knew the dangers of what they were involved in. they elected to be there. it is a tragic loss of life, but it's not one that we, you know, obviously as the senator said, this is a terrible intelligence failure. but what is the case moving forward? now that rice has gone up there and done her due diligence with meeting three of her harshest critics, how does she move on from this if she is the one, again, by these three senators be pinned with, well, she was wrong the whole time? >> thomas, that's a good question. i would say that the focus here, i really think should be on what happened catching these terrorists and making sure it doesn't happen again. and i think with this overheated rhetoric, we're missing the point, and that is to really investigate the security around the consulate and then what happened afterwards. and i think that's where we should be focusing our energy. i think that, look, if the president chooses to nominate her to be secretary of state, she's very well qualified. she should be able to receive a fair hearing from in th
. president obama's re-election means the taxes for upper income earners are going up one way or another. speaker john boehner deserves some leeway to try to mitigate the damage by negotiating a larger tax reform. leeway to negotiate sounds pretty sane to me. for some, of course, that's a great big lump of coal wrapped up as an early christmas present. >> revenue that happens to be the democratic code word for tax increases. that is simply not an acceptable position for any true conservative. republicans were not elected to rubber stamp obama's agenda. >> seems some news personalities may be taking a tax increase on the highest earners somewhat personally. anyway, republicans didn't win the white house or the senate. i wonder what other conservatives have to say about that. >> the republicans are in a shocking amount of disarray right now. the republican party has not developed an alternative idea set other than what mitt romney and paul ryan were campaigning on and sort of by default it has become their opening negotiation position. >> i see. so their opening position is the one that wa
of catholicism endangered american freedom and back in the "leave it to beaver" days they wouldn't even elect a catholic president until j.f.k. gave a speech ensuring protestant clergy he wouldn't take orders from the pope. he would take orders from something that starts with a "p" and resembles a wrinkled old man wearing a hat. ( laughter ) ( applause ) "ask not what you can do for your country. let's just find some chicks." how do you think traditional americans would have reacted to a mormon candidate for president? seeing as in 1857, president buchanan sent the army to utah to fight them. bernie, bernie, bill, fox, you don't need to worry so much. ... what you are demonstrating is the health and vitality of america's greatest tradition-- a fevered ruling class lamenting the rise of a new et cetera nickly diverse new class one that will destroy all that is virtuous and good and bring the american experiment crashing to the ground. except you're forgetting one thing-- that is the american experiment. ap ethnic group arriving on america's shores, to be reviled, living in scallor, or if the
to "the ed show" tonight. "what david plouffe has stated concerns me deeply. in the election and in poll after poll after poll at a time when the middle class is disappearing and the numb of people living in poverty is at an all-time high. the american people demanded that there be no benefit cuts to medicare, medicaid and social security for those who are doing well must be asked to play a significant role. here, here. i'm on board with that. the public agrees with senator sanders. i'm not the only one. in the latest cnn poll, 56% of americans believe that taxes for the wealthy should be raised to help pay for programs such as medicare and medicaid. this is in line with exactly what president obama said on the campaign trail and in his first speech after winning reelection. the president said that we would not balance the budget on the backs of those struging in our society. are those people being asked to bend a little bit despite the tremendous victory that liberals had in november? i think it was november 6th, wasn't it? not real long ago. so here we are setting some dangerous bounda
that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. >> just 16 days since election officials called the state of florida for president obama and republicans there are starting to reveal the dirty tricks they placed. charlie crist told the palm beach post that there was a coordinated effort by governor rick scott and others to suppress the democratic vote. former florida republican party chairman jim gear said: >> at said: >> even as it becomes clear the voter discrimination is still a very real problem in parts of this country. the supreme court will hear arguments about getting rid of section five of the voting lights act of 1965. the act signed by president johnson said areas with a history of discrimination must get approval for any new voting laws. nine southern states plus counties in new york, and michigan fall under its jurisdiction. in the case, shelby county v. holder, one alabama county is challenging the law saying it unfairly targets their state. six other signed on. joining me now to discuss is julian bond, the former chairman of the naacp and instrumen
talking behind the scenes and president obama has already hosted congressional leaders for a post election sit-down. but the president is also launching a new pr effort, a campaign, some are calling it here, starting with the white house meeting today, of small business owners. then tomorrow, the president hosts more business owners and a group of middle class americans who would be hurt if the tax hikes take effect the first of the year. then friday, a campaign style stop in pennsylvania, a toy factory of all places, highlighting the importance of middle class consumers in this holiday season. but back in washington, senate leaders, they are speaking out. you have democrat harry reid saying the president won the election. and it is time for republicans to fall in line. meantime, republican mitch mcconnell not impressed with the president's plans to go back on the road. take a listen. >> look, we already know the president is a very good campaigner, congratulate him on his re-election. what we don't know is whether he has the leadership qualities necessary to lead it a bipartisan agreement
the president is fond of susan rice. you saw that in the press conference after the election. he really forcefully defended her. you saw more passionate people had been waiting for from the president. if there's a time to push someone, the president believes is the best personed to the job, it's after you win the election in a pretty strong way. so the president, i think, if he wants to push her, now is the team to do it. it's interesting that so many senators such as john mccain and lindsey graham oppose her. policy-wise she's closer to them in terms of policy and intervention and human rights than, say, senator john kerry, for example. >> amanamanda, you referenced t press conference where the president went to bat for susan rice. let's actually take a listen to them. >> for them to go after the u.n. ambassador who this nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmurch her reputation is outrageous. when they gt after the u.n. ambassador apparently because they think she's an easy target, then they've got a prob
representatives tom price and keith ellison. >> brown: then, president obama sat down with mexico's president-elect, enrique pena nieto, this afternoon. one topic for them and for us tonight: the war on drugs, on both sides of the border. >> suarez: as lawmakers talk of reducing the country's debt, paul solman offers a history lesson on centuries of federal borrowing. >> the united states was going into default. we defaulted on many obligations to foreign creditors and to our own soldiers. >> brown: plus, every month, 1,000 young americans are infected with h.i.v., and most of those with the disease don't even know they have it. hari sreenivasan looks at a new report from the c.d.c. that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs newshour has been provided by: moving our economy for 160 years. bnsf, the engine that connects us. and by the alfred p. sloan foundation. supporting science, technology, and improved economic performance and financial literacy in the 21st century. and with the ongoing support of these institutions and foundations. and... this program was made possible by
through the election. and they're handing out flyers all over the heartland of the country, obama is not going to take your guns, they're trying to fog the election and get through the election, but if they do, it's katie bar the door. stuart: yes indeedy, look at black friday. next hour we'll talk to the gun store owner who took out the ad in the paper. if you voted for barack obama, your business is not welcome. it's been great for his business. he's on the show the top of the hour coming up. perhaps all research in motion needed was "varney & company" to put it on death watch. since we did so, the stock is up 5 #% in one month. 70% up in three months, a lot of positive buzz surrounding the blackberry 10 due the end of january and the stock has gone straight up despite our death watch. maybe we should put microsoft, a stock that i own, on death watch. take a look at the video please, two armed robbers made off with nearly $100,000 in black friday cash. the two men hid in a target store in new jersey, after it closed, they entered the cash room, that's where cops say the men tied
in libya. >>> the election was only three weeks ago, but president obama's about to shift back into campaign mode. and we're learning exclusive new details about the personal and professional life of the woman at the center of the scandal that forced the resignation of cia director david petraeus. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> we begin with the obama administration's latest attempt to explain the misleading information given out in the days after the september 11th attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. four americans including the u.s. ambassador to libya died in what we now know was a terrorist attack. but that isn't what the u.s. ambassador to the united nations susan rice said when she went on national television five days after the attack. today rice is up on capitol hill. she's explaining what happened and some big-name republicans clearly are not very happy with her answers. our senior congressional correspondent dana bash is following what's become a pretty long day -- a tiring day for the u.s. ambassador to the u.n. what's the latest,
the iranians, remember they have a presidential election coming up, and if there's a deal cut and it's associated to someone who might be running for president, you better believe it. the opponents will try to attack it and try to undermine them. we've seen that will before. this is an executive issue. it's also an united nations issue and a p-5 plus one. i think the president of the united states comes in and says, look, we have the leaders of france and britain and china and russia and the u.n. and we're trying to prevent nuclear weapons, you know, you should probably not meddle in this. that's a winnable argument. i think particularly coming out of this -- obama out of a strong election. no one like gaddafi. no one liked libya. no one liked the soviets. it's doable. >> to partially answer the same question. the issue for many in congress is whether this negotiation quote-unquote allows iran to continue enriching at the 3.5% level or not. the historical position of the united states going back to the early 2000's has been that there should be a suspension of all enrichment as a con
been the story in america for the past three decades. this election with a bit of a referendum on that balance of power. we will see if the president has that muscle to push that through. interesting that you mentioned mark carney. he is a hero, in my book. as one of the governors of the bank of canada, he thought -- fought the powers there. >> sure the discussion that america is having now focus on this issue of inequality that you have written about in your book? and will the election results give president obama a mandate to do just that? >> i think it should be part of the discussion. the argument sometimes from conservatives, and also from not just the 1%, but the 0.1%, is, does it make sense to focus on the rich if there is not that much revenue there? actually, i think so much money is concentrated at the top of the income distribution, there is money to be had. but equally important hit a sense of fairness. as warren buffett has pointed out, the fact that he pays taxes at an effective rate much lower to that -- much lower than that of lower-income americans, makes it ha
'm not obligated on the pledge. i was just elected. the only thing i'm honoring is the oath that i take that i've sworn in in january. >> that is the sound of cracks forming in grover norquist's facade. he's the guy who gets republicans to sign a pledge that they will never ever under any circumstances raise taxes. but with the fiscal cliff looming, there's a growing consensus that taxes may have to go up. norquist said those who reneged would pay a price. >> would you target some of them? >> we would certainly highlight who has kept their commitment and who hasn't. >> fortunately for grover, but unfortunately for those who want everyone to contribute their fair share there are plenty of republicans caught in the pass, plenty who can't accept that president obama won reelection >> there are some republicans who recognize they did lose and that new revenue new tax revenue will have to be part of any deficit deal. i noticed mitch mcconnell's talked about tax rates. he's going to insist that tax rates not go any higher. you've got the mathematicians trying to raise the numbers. you can exact the
is that republicans seem to be running around with the tail between their leg after the election and acquiescing on revenues and letting the democrats stream roll them and he says they will pay in two years. do you feel threatened? >>guest: will, republicans have to be for some things and we need to be for things and for spending cuts. we need to be for entitlement reform. that has to be done if we are ever going to be serious about this debt issue, i don't think we should disrespect grover norquist any more than i believe we should disrespect the heritage foundation or any others. i respect them. we just don't always agree. >>neil: what he is saying, senator, he says that there is much more propensity to come up with creative ways to raise revenue than to cut spending. and that it is disproportionately so and republicans are going along with this like idiots. >> well, the negotiations have not seriously begun and people have staked out various positions so we with have to look at the products of the negotiations. >>neil: will we avoid a calamity? >> i'm not sure. i don't think we will because i
. >>> elections have consequences and the democrats are feeling emboldened. they want to see taxes go up on the rich. will they give president obama room to negotiate some kind of deal that gets through this hell coming january 1st. they say they won, the other side lost, they're going to fight. >>> plus democrats are moving to end the so-called silent filibuster which republicans have used to quietly say if you don't have 60 votes, you ain't going nowhere. this is the big question, if they're successful it's possible, it's possible the democrats will be able to get some things done. we'll talk about that in a minute. they're going to be just like jimmy stewart finally. they're going to force them to actually filibuster like they did in mr. smith goes to washington. anytime they really want to shut down the senate. >>> and the democrats considered least likely to win back her senate seat beats the odds thanks to todd akin and is back for a second term. our friend the great claire mccaskill joins us tonight, the senator from missouri. >>> what's the first sound you hear after a democrat w
. the election -- go ahead. i'm sorry. gerri: i was thinking, so much equanimity. >> reporter: well, the election is over. the campaign continues in washington. congressional leaders admit talks over how to get the federal budget in order have slowed. congressional aides say they have received no and buy from the white house for another deficit meeting. instead, the president is hosting small business leaders, ceos, and heading to philadelphia to sell his position on taxes. a spokesman for the house speaker says the president should be focusing on congressional democrats who republicans they refuse to offer necessary spending cuts. other republicans said democrats are simply continuing election season. >> this seems like our friend on the other side are having difficulty turning off the campaign. we need to sit down and work this matter out. >> we are all here, this administration and those who have been elected to congress, to erve the iraqi people. to suggest that we should, now that the election is over, stop talking to them about these vital issues i think is bad advice. >> republicans also
election, the november election, it was a referendum on many republicans. some of them walked away and said, okay, we did not get the senate back, we are moving forward. our republican candidates did not win the presidency were many officers. >> people were looking round the waist deep in seeing a lot of their friends have lost. barack obama may have won the white house, but e republicans do have the house of representatives. the american public is saying that we should stick to the principal principle message that we have said. washington is running way too much money. there may be differences in want of other issues, t on this one, most americans agree that there's too much waste and fraud and abuse and let's eliminate that. cheryl: where do they fit nto this scenario? fatcat ceos, those from honeywell, allstate, do you think that that is going to be a sitive conversation? will congressional leaders listen? >> i would think that they have been listening to the ceos all along. and even lookng at wall street and main street and they all say the same thing. we want certainty out of washingto
what's here is a cover-up that barack obama right before the election wanted to cover up -- well something. i don't know what they're trying to cover up. but he didn't want it to be an act of terror. if he had said this is an act of terrorism, probably would go shooting up in the polls at the time. so there's no sense -- >> he did say it was -- >> there's no point, no sense to their charge of a cover-up. but saying that the state department security office screwed up, doesn't get you at the white house, doesn't get the president or susan rice or anybody else of a high position in the line of fire. which is what they want. so this is again and again they're trying to suggest that something is wrong, said what the cia told her and it is i think as richard said, kind of an immature exercise and the common ritual you go up to capitol hill after weeks of this and they come out and say we kind of sorted this out, still have other questions, but their appearance, if they don't back up their troubles, the fact that they're troubled by this with some details, it just shows you they're not
an election. >> ambassador rice said today absolutely it was wrong. i don't understand the cia said clearly that information was wrong. and they knew by the 22nd it was wrong. yet, they have not cleared that up with the american people. >> in a statement just now, susan rice admits that the initial information about a protest in benghazi was incorrect, but says no one intended to mislead the public. business as usual, congress is back and picks up just where it left off. stalemated over tax rates and entitlement spending. >> unfortunately, there's one obstacle standing between congress and compromise, grover norquist. for years, norquist has bullied lawmakers willing to put their oath of office or promise to serve constituents ahead of their pledge to this anti-tax zell lot. >> the washington democrats, every dollar that's ever been secured for anything is sacred. every dollar secured for anything is sacred. and they'll defend it to the death regardless of what it means for jobs, or the economy. >>> coming up here, the it's top economic adviser alan krueger. clashes in cairo today, more pro
about protecting and that democrats talk about protecting last election. it goes right after, it hits the middle class and lower income people the hardest of course because it is incredibly regressive. let me ask you, i feel like today when i was hearing talk about trying to close this gap we're looking under every broke for more money and more tax revenue. doesn't seem like we're cutting spending very much s that the right impression. >> keep in mind, melissa. you and i know this. a lot of viewers might not know, we have 5.3 trillion deficit because of one person, that is obama. he doesn't seem to change his behavioral patterns now so it is not getting any better. how could we his own budget come up with $5.3 trillion in four years and then say, now we have to somehow find $1.2 trillion for 10 years? meantime he will continue to go ahead and increase the deficit. so i don't have any faith in it. look, this morning i was on "fox & friends." i outlined a lot of alternatives we could do where we wouldn't have to raise taxes. one was, i already introduced legislation that would take care
: >> it's funny to watch a senator or congressman who got himself elected by promising the citizen of his state that he would go to washington to reform government and not to pay taxes. when the going gets rough he wanted to debt ceiling increase. the same cast of chakts are turns in the homework for the second tyne two years later and there's not a snowball rolling. the good news is the people that gave a commitment to the american voters. for four years president obama has not reined in spending. all he did is demand $1.6 trillion of tax increase so he can spend more money, not reining in spending. we need focus on spending problems because that's the problem we have. >> warren buffett wrote this fascinating piece in the "new york times" today. you're familiar with it today. suppose they come to you with an investment idea. i'm in it. i think you should be, too. would your reply be this? it depends on what my tax rate is on the gain we're going to make. if the tax isn't too high, i'd rather leave the money in my savings account. war len buff set says only in norquist imagine kwis. why a
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 174 (some duplicates have been removed)